History Main / AppealToNature

11th May '16 3:25:24 PM Josef5678
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* In ''Film/{{JurassicPark}}'', Malcolm states that bringing back dinosaurs is bad partly because that's going against natural selection and humans shouldn't oppose nature.

to:

* In ''Film/{{JurassicPark}}'', ''Film/JurassicPark'', Malcolm states that bringing back dinosaurs is bad partly because that's going against natural selection and humans shouldn't oppose nature.
11th May '16 11:49:55 AM Mr.Phorcys
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* In ''Film/{{JurassicPark}}'', Malcolm states that bringing back dinosaurs is bad partly because that's going against natural selection and humans shouldn't oppose nature.
1st May '16 3:44:03 PM Fireblood
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The overuse and misuse of antibiotics, pesticides, and herbicides (and the resulting resistance and health and environmental effects) have led quite a few people to denouncing ''all'' use of them per the appeal to nature, right down to claiming a ConspiracyTheory that any or all of the above are part of a DepopulationBomb conspiracy. The problem is that while overuse and misuse needs to stop, to obliterate these products entirely (or allowing their continuing overuse and misuse to do just that by creating 100% resistance) ''will'' lead to TheEndOfTheWorldAsWeKnowIt. Especially in regard to antibiotics -- these are the medications that turned such diseases as pneumonia, syphilis, and bubonic plague from terminal pandemic illnesses into quickly curable illnesses. In the same way, while modern pesticides and their manufacture are bad for the environment and are carcinogenic and mutagenic, they are also a vital part in the control of disease-spreading, food-ruining, or venomous insect pests, especially for people and situations where setting up more natural methods of barriers and predators would be problematic.
* The idea of the superior "NobleSavage" has popped up repeatedly for centuries. The supposed moral superiority of the primitive person or beasts over civilized man has been a repeated assertion of certain philosophical romanticists such as Rousseau. Of course, since NatureIsNotNice, a lot of these savage cultures have some 25% of their men dying in war, 20-50% of children failing to survive their childhood, and widespread polygamy (not very popular with these romanticists) in part as a consequence of the imbalance in the sexes resulting from this high mortality rate; not exactly what most of these philosophers would deem desirable outcomes for our cultures. Lampshaded by a December 1977 ''Magazine/{{MAD}} Magazine'' article on "The History of Medicine": "In the Stone Age, very few people had childhood illnesses. The reason for this was simple: very few people had childhoods."

to:

* The overuse and misuse of antibiotics, pesticides, and herbicides (and the resulting resistance and health and environmental effects) have led quite a few people to denouncing ''all'' use of them per the appeal to nature, right down to claiming a ConspiracyTheory that any or all of the above are part of a DepopulationBomb conspiracy. The problem is that while overuse and misuse needs to stop, to obliterate these products entirely (or allowing their continuing overuse and misuse to do just that by creating 100% resistance) ''will'' lead to TheEndOfTheWorldAsWeKnowIt. Especially in regard to antibiotics -- these are the medications that turned such diseases as pneumonia, syphilis, and bubonic plague from terminal pandemic illnesses into quickly curable illnesses. In the same way, while many modern pesticides and their manufacture are bad for the environment and are carcinogenic and mutagenic, environment, they are also a vital part in the control of disease-spreading, food-ruining, or venomous insect pests, especially for people and situations where setting up more natural methods of barriers and predators would be problematic.
problematic. Ironically, organic farmers ''also'' use pesticides (made of "natural" toxins) which can be ''more'' harmful than synthetic ones since they are subject to far less testing. Additionally organic farming requires far more land use, meaning it could not possibly feed all the people necessary in today's world. The same arguments also apply to GMOs.
* The idea of the superior "NobleSavage" has popped up repeatedly for centuries. The supposed moral superiority of the primitive person or beasts over civilized man has been a repeated assertion of certain philosophical romanticists such as Rousseau. Of course, since NatureIsNotNice, a lot of these savage "savage" cultures have some 25% of their men dying in war, 20-50% of children failing to survive their childhood, and widespread polygamy (not very popular with these romanticists) in part as a consequence of the imbalance in the sexes resulting from this high mortality rate; not exactly what most of these philosophers would deem desirable outcomes for our cultures. Lampshaded by a December 1977 ''Magazine/{{MAD}} Magazine'' article on "The History of Medicine": "In the Stone Age, very few people had childhood illnesses. The reason for this was simple: very few people had childhoods."
1st May '16 3:36:09 PM Fireblood
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Unlike the laws of physics, the laws of morality can be disobeyed, such that science cannot prove the transgression to be inherently wrong. Science only knows that murder exists, and cannot prove murder is wrong (this often comes up in questions of WhatIsEvil). Science cannot answer questions of good and evil, these being [[AboveGoodAndEvil out of its jurisdiction]]. All science can do is ''inform'' ethical decisions by telling people how various aspects of nature work (such as whether smoking tobacco is harmful and thus immoral to advertise to people one shouldn't be harming). There is a minority of philosophers that disagree, saying science can determine moral values.

to:

Unlike the laws of physics, the laws of morality can be disobeyed, such that science cannot prove the transgression to be inherently wrong. Science only knows that murder exists, and cannot prove murder is wrong (this often comes up in questions of WhatIsEvil). Science cannot answer questions of good and evil, these being [[AboveGoodAndEvil out of its jurisdiction]]. All science can do is ''inform'' ethical decisions by telling people how various aspects of nature work (such work, such as whether smoking tobacco is harmful and thus it may be immoral to advertise to people one shouldn't be harming). There harming (there is a minority of philosophers that disagree, saying science can determine moral values.values).
17th Apr '16 4:02:12 PM DiagorasCinna
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* ''Literature/OneNationUnderJupiter'': Diagoras invokes this, claiming homosexuality goes against evolution.
6th Apr '16 1:54:08 PM Tuckerscreator
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* In ''The Big Honey Hunt'' (the first of ''Literature/TheBerenstainBears'' series), the Bear family is out of honey. Mama Bear asks Papa Bear to buy some more, but he insists on gathering it the old fashioned way, bringing along his son to search for honey from a wild comb. In the process they anger many animals, including the beehive defending the honey they want. At the end, Papa and son settle for buying honey from the store.
24th Mar '16 2:42:44 PM margdean56
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** In another book, Ankh-Morpork's notorious CMOT Dibbler is making himself a killing off a particularly desperate dandruff sufferer selling herbal shampoo "now with more herbs!" One character notes, "throw a bunch of weeds in the pot and you've got herbs."

to:

** In another book, Ankh-Morpork's notorious CMOT Dibbler is making himself a killing off of a particularly desperate dandruff sufferer by selling herbal shampoo "now with more herbs!" One character notes, "throw a bunch of weeds in the pot and you've got herbs."
24th Mar '16 2:41:34 PM margdean56
Is there an issue? Send a Message


MoralGuardians are not the only ones to employ this fallacy; for example, some despotic ideologues have made arguments from natural selection to justify SocialDarwinism and the [[TheSociopath sociopathic]] extermination of those they deem "unfit" or "unworthy" of life. Another extreme example is {{Straw Nihilist}}s who contend for unbridled hedonism on the grounds that we are nothing ''but'' animals pursuing our animal desires for food, shelter, and procreation and should therefore stop "denying" ourselves of these "healthy" natural pursuits.

to:

MoralGuardians are not the only ones to employ this fallacy; for example, some despotic ideologues have made arguments from natural selection to justify SocialDarwinism and the [[TheSociopath sociopathic]] extermination of those they deem "unfit" or "unworthy" of life. Another extreme example is {{Straw Nihilist}}s who contend for unbridled hedonism on the grounds that we are nothing ''but'' animals pursuing our animal desires for food, shelter, and procreation and should therefore stop "denying" ourselves of these "healthy" natural pursuits.
5th Mar '16 11:39:17 AM Josef5678
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The overuse and misuse of antibiotics, pesticides, and herbicides (and the resulting resistance and health and environmental effects) have led quite a few people to denouncing ''all'' use of them per the AppealToNature, right down to claiming a ConspiracyTheory that any or all of the above are part of a DepopulationBomb conspiracy. The problem is that while overuse and misuse needs to stop, to obliterate these products entirely (or allowing their continuing overuse and misuse to do just that by creating 100% resistance) ''will'' lead to TheEndOfTheWorldAsWeKnowIt. Especially in regard to antibiotics -- these are the medications that turned such diseases as pneumonia, syphilis, and bubonic plague from terminal pandemic illnesses into quickly curable illnesses. In the same way, while modern pesticides and their manufacture are bad for the environment and are carcinogenic and mutagenic, they are also a vital part in the control of disease-spreading, food-ruining, or venomous insect pests, especially for people and situations where setting up more natural methods of barriers and predators would be problematic.

to:

* The overuse and misuse of antibiotics, pesticides, and herbicides (and the resulting resistance and health and environmental effects) have led quite a few people to denouncing ''all'' use of them per the AppealToNature, appeal to nature, right down to claiming a ConspiracyTheory that any or all of the above are part of a DepopulationBomb conspiracy. The problem is that while overuse and misuse needs to stop, to obliterate these products entirely (or allowing their continuing overuse and misuse to do just that by creating 100% resistance) ''will'' lead to TheEndOfTheWorldAsWeKnowIt. Especially in regard to antibiotics -- these are the medications that turned such diseases as pneumonia, syphilis, and bubonic plague from terminal pandemic illnesses into quickly curable illnesses. In the same way, while modern pesticides and their manufacture are bad for the environment and are carcinogenic and mutagenic, they are also a vital part in the control of disease-spreading, food-ruining, or venomous insect pests, especially for people and situations where setting up more natural methods of barriers and predators would be problematic.
23rd Feb '16 8:20:48 PM Fireblood
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* In an extension of this, multiple supplements are now claiming (verbatim) "It's all natural, so there are no side effects." Depending on the product, this is either a case of misleading truth (it's natural ''and'' there are no side effects, whether its primary effect will do you any good or not), a case of BlatantLies (it's natural, and there are some side effects, but these are just other natural aspects of it) or a case of selective omission. (It's all natural, and there ''are'' no side effects. There are no ''primary'' effects either because this is actually just a placebo to help you psychologically while you follow the rest of the instructions we give you. ''Those'' are what will actually make you healthy.)

to:

* In an extension of this, multiple supplements are now claiming (verbatim) "It's all natural, so there are no side effects." Depending on the product, this is either a case of misleading truth (it's natural ''and'' there are no side effects, whether its primary effect will do you any good or not), a case of BlatantLies (it's natural, and there are some side effects, but these are just other natural aspects of it) or a case of selective omission. (It's omission (it's all natural, and there ''are'' no side effects. There are no ''primary'' effects either because this is actually just a placebo to help you psychologically while you follow the rest of the instructions we give you. ''Those'' are what will actually make you healthy.)healthy).



* War is often said to be bad because it's a human invention, which isn't really true. Also not human inventions: Agriculture (ants and termites, among others), division of labor (multiple species), language (disputed- multiple species), ownership (disputed- multiple species), tool use (apes, octopuses, crows, and others), or... well, actually, we didn't invent a lot. We mostly just do a lot of things other species do, but do it on a grander scale. What makes humans, or perhaps even just certain cultures, unique is the method in which we adapt and pass information on, forming increasingly complex societies that have greater ecological impacts. We didn't even invent paper. Wasps did that. We did, however, invent ''writing'' on paper -- and writing in general, to be perfectly blunt. Wasps mostly just live in their paper, which incidentally includes crapping on it. (If you've ever seen a wasp's nest, you might notice black liquid dripping from it. That's wasp poop. [[BrainBleach You're welcome]]!)

to:

* War is often said to be bad because it's a human invention, which isn't really true. Also not human inventions: Agriculture agriculture (ants and termites, among others), division of labor (multiple species), language (disputed- multiple (disputed-multiple species), ownership (disputed- multiple (disputed-multiple species), tool use (apes, octopuses, crows, and others), or... well, actually, we didn't invent a lot. We mostly just do a lot of things other species do, but do it on a grander scale. What makes humans, or perhaps even just certain cultures, unique is the method in which we adapt and pass information on, forming increasingly complex societies that have greater ecological impacts. We didn't even invent paper. Wasps did that. We did, however, invent ''writing'' on paper -- and writing in general, to be perfectly blunt. Wasps mostly just live in their paper, which incidentally includes crapping on it. (If it (if you've ever seen a wasp's nest, you might notice black liquid dripping from it. That's wasp poop. [[BrainBleach You're welcome]]!)welcome]]!).



* This fallacy has been popping up in pop ethical philosophy ever since evolutionary biologists came up with a working explanation for why altruism is so widespread in nature. People introduced to this philosophy for the first time usually aren't told about how the group's natural needs thought to give rise to this altruism can also be used to justify atrocities, do not guarantee the group will develop any decent ethics, and do nothing whatsoever to define what is and isn't ethical in the first place, let alone support any ontological arguments such as whether humans develop this behavior naturally or God influences them to do so.

to:

* This fallacy has been popping up in pop ethical philosophy ever since evolutionary biologists came up with a working explanation for why altruism is so widespread in nature. People introduced to this philosophy for the first time usually aren't told about how the group's natural needs thought to give rise to this altruism can also be used to justify atrocities, do not guarantee the group will develop any decent ethics, and do nothing whatsoever to define what is and isn't ethical in the first place, let alone support any ontological arguments such as whether humans develop this behavior naturally solely by natural selection or if God influences them to do so.so as well.



* The argument in favor of the tropes MyGirlIsNotASlut and ImAManICantHelpIt. The idea is that men are supposed to impregnate as many women as they can, and thus have a ''need'' to be promiscuous, while [[AllWomenArePrudes women are supposed to be the ones that are choosy]].

to:

* The argument in favor of the tropes MyGirlIsNotASlut and ImAManICantHelpIt. The idea is that men are supposed to impregnate as many women as they can, and thus have a ''need'' to be promiscuous, while [[AllWomenArePrudes women are supposed to be the ones that are choosy]]. Even if true biologically, that would not make it right.



* The pseudoscientific practice of [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunaception Lunaception]] posits that before the advent of artificial lighting, women's menstrual cycles were perfectly synched to the moon's phases, with ovulation taking place at the full moon and menstruation taking place at the new moon (unless, of course, she was pregnant or nursing, or not of reproductive age). The solution to menstrual irregularities and infertility, according to this practice, is to reset the body's clock by eliminating light from the bedroom except during the full moon. Supposedly, it also eliminates the need for artificial contraception, as ovulation is supposed to become more predictable.

to:

* The pseudoscientific practice of [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunaception Lunaception]] posits that before the advent of artificial lighting, women's menstrual cycles were perfectly synched synced to the moon's phases, with ovulation taking place at the full moon and menstruation taking place at the new moon (unless, of course, she was pregnant or nursing, or not of reproductive age). The solution to menstrual irregularities and infertility, according to this practice, is to reset the body's clock by eliminating light from the bedroom except during the full moon. Supposedly, it also eliminates the need for artificial contraception, as ovulation is supposed to become more predictable.
This list shows the last 10 events of 159. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.AppealToNature